Introduction

We will talk about discernment in an attempt to capture the phenomenology of a “gesture of thought” (Depraz, 2022) that is present in all the distinctions and in all the research in which thought engages. Our aim is to elucidate the place of this phenomenon (concept/virtue/charisma) in terms of its origin and dynamics, of the relation of saturation created between intuition and concept; in other words, between what is given in the spiritual experience of discernment and what we add from our intellect, in this encounter that cannot be reduced to knowledge. According to Jean-Luc Marion’s famous analysis, “an irreducible excess of intuition over all the concepts” (Marion, 2002: xxi) is what defines the saturated phenomenon, a phenomenon characterized by richness of gift, event, and surprise. The main questions of this theo-phenomenological research would then be as follows: Can one speak of a saturated phenomenon in the case of discernment? To what extent are affectivity and thought involved in the acquisition and practice of spiritual discernment?Footnote 1

Theoretical Discernment and the Noetic-Noematic Dimension

Theoretical Discernment and the Transcendental Ego

We will recognize from the outset the impasse we find ourselves in when claiming to offer knowledge about what is in an act as it unfolds and in its discursiveness. The operation of making distinctions is inevitably involved in both our theoretical and practical knowledge, just as it is of paramount importance for our spiritual life. Paradoxically, we speak of discernment while operating with distinctions, i.e., while we are already in the act of discerning. This is the most general meaning of discernment, which we will use as a starting point in order to move on to the core of the present research, namely the discernment practiced in the tradition and spirituality of Eastern Christianity.

Discernment (diakrisis) is understood to be the faculty of distinguishing and appreciating things at their true value, having to do with the very faculty that defines human being– reason. As a general human faculty, discernment is synonymous with reason and common sense but also with sagacity, wisdom, perception (2024). After all, if it is true that “to know is to discriminate” or to discern (Foucault, 2005: 61), then discernment can be viewed as accompanying our cognitive acts and our intentionality in its various forms. The Husserlian ego, Heidegger’s Dasein, Marion’s gifted one (adonné), and the person in Christian theology– all these avatars of the subject engaged in relations of knowledge, being and salvation already possess the minimal discernment required to honour these relations. Though acquired through maturity and education, discernment becomes a condition of possibility for our knowledge and understanding. Rather than considering an a priori transcendental structure and its generative force, we should see here a form of thought identifying with itself; one which defines human being. Discernment has grown out of itself with age and life experience; at its origin, it was synonymous with human rationality, despite sometimes appearing in the guise of a tool of thought or of a skill. Let us therefore recognize its position in the transcendental ego itself, as a faculty of it, which no reduction can put in brackets– for discernment is present in the very act of reduction; let us recognize it, therefore, as one of our untranscendable strengths.

It is a point earned and by no means a small one. This first configuration of discernment appears as being of the ego, as a capacity that we possess in varying proportions, a genuine virtue of thought synonymous with intelligence and with all its degrees, from normality to genius. Let us take a step further now and capture it in its intentionality.

Intentionality, Noetic Act, Noematic Content

“To discern” is an intentional verb that emphasizes the existence of noematic content: discernment is always the discernment of something, in a noematic context threatened by confusion. Husserl said about intentionality that it „signifies nothing else than this universal fundamental property of consciousness: to be consciousness of something” (Husserl, 1960: 33) and that applies here to discernment.

In a broad sense, discernment is present in our intentional acts as a possibility of distinction and as insight. It appears, therefore, as a noetic act, an act of intentional consciousness, in conjunction with other intentional acts. At the same time, if discernment is the discernment of something, then it has to do with noematic contents that must be distinguished from each other, following the processes of knowledge and, in practical cases, of deliberation. If “to discern” also means “to perceive with difficulty,” “to see as through a mist,” then, according to this meaning, discernment proves useful when we encounter phenomena that are difficult to discern, such as spiritual ones; for discernment can refer to the spiritual, not the material, according to Benedicta Ward (see Ward, 2007: xiii).

When applied, discernment appears as the ability to distinguish between what we should think/do/choose in various theoretical and practical situations, an ability that children acquire as they mature and one that fools do not possess (anymore).

Discernment as Practical Wisdom

Aristotle and Practical Discernment

Aristotle pointed out that discernment is a part of the deliberative faculty of reason and is related to its practical and ethical application. According to the Greek philosopher, the spirit of discernment (gnome) is ranked among the minor virtues, which stand alongside the five major virtues: science (episteme), intuitive intellect (nous), speculative wisdom (sophia), art (techne) and practical wisdom (phronesis) (Mureșan, 2007: 216f.). He defines discernment as “the faculty of judging correctly what is equitable” (Aristotle, 1934: 1143a), which refers to the virtue of being tolerant and distinguishing right from wrong. In this case, discernment has to do with making the right moral decision in the circumstances of everyday life, with practical wisdom and political action.

The ability to put ethical principles into practice can be developed through education and experience. In the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle even states that this discernment is linked to age and experience, originating in nature itself, which highlights the importance of old age:

Consequently the unproven assertions and opinions of experienced and aged people, or of prudent men, are as much deserving of attention as those which they support by proof; for experience has given them an eye for things, and so they see correctly. (Aristotle, 1934: 1143b)

Let us keep in mind this capacity that discernment has of being educable and, at the same time, its connection with the ethical principles and with the concrete, often conjunctural, situations in which it manifests itself. As noted, discernment is to Aristotle a faculty of discursive reason (dianoia) and has a practical application, without being confused with the theoretical capacity to distinguish, which belongs to the intellect (nous). Finally, discernment implies the capacity to make a decision that is appropriate to the situation that requires it. (Interpreting is followed by deciding; according to Emmanuel Falque, they already constitute the first two steps on the path from philosophy towards theology, the third step being the crossing from the former to the latter (see Falque, 2016: 33). Both interpretation and decision require the practice of discernment– either theoretical or practical. Crossing from philosophy towards theology means using a power of discernment by virtue of which neither philosophy nor theology lose their own identity; instead, they enrich each other.)

Learning, Criteria, World

In its applicability, discernment is the ability to judge concrete situations according to certain principles and criteria, while also being related to the context or the world in which it manifests itself. The decisional and diacritical character of thought is inevitably connected to its world or to an implicit tradition which, starting from its own axiology, provides the criteria for discernment.

One could imagine that, depending on the constitution of the world, the forms of discernment related to the experience that has constituted itself as a world are different. Depending on how we judge these criteria of discernment– ethical grounds, forms of will to power, contextual principles, etc.– discernment can have different nuances, depending on our understanding of good and evil. But what is important here is that, by manifesting itself in a given world and in a particular context, discernment is bound up with the “logic” of that context, with the tradition that structures it, and with the particular experience of life.

Poor Phenomenon, Saturated Phenomenon, Suspended Phenomenon

It could be argued that, in the topology of the saturated phenomenon that we propose here, a form of discernment that only applies previously learned criteria– through experience or education– can be considered a poor phenomenon. Applying discernment does not mean going beyond the criteria already given, but merely judging each concrete situation according to them. Even if we were to consider it as a natural gift and not a dianoetic virtue, discernment remains within this framework which excludes saturation.

In this situation, to discern– i.e., to interpret and decide– means to recognize the particular experience, to perceive its repetition, and to apply, even intuitively, previously acquired criteria. The poverty of this kind of discernment is, in fact, the poverty of the phenomena that appear in the world and that fit previous criteria.

On the other hand, one might consider that, when dealing with saturated phenomena– the event, the face, the body, the paradox–, discernment would itself become problematic and insufficient, varying between different degrees of saturation. Going further, one might say that, in the face of these phenomena, discernment is exposed to risk, incapable of promising a solution free of doubt in the face of an event that demands deliberation yet evades it. It is a form of discernment that is itself in excess, that lacks the criteria that could be used to solve the problem, and that ultimately risks failure. When faced with saturated phenomena, discernment appears almost as being saturated to varying degrees. What must also be said is that, depending on the degree of saturation, discernment can be lost and can even become suspended, stopped, liable to error, and ineffective. We can recognize here the pattern of a saturated phenomenon, given the excess that saturates discernment; but we can observe that, in the face of the excess of the phenomenon, the degrees of saturation can render discernment ineffective, suspending it.

Thus, after encountering the excess of saturated phenomena, we could recognize the saturation of discernment in their presence, as well as the risk of discernment being suspended altogether. The saying “Love is blind” bears witness precisely to this suspension of discernment in exceptional, excessive cases.

Discernment as a Virtue and a Spiritual Gift

An Additional Saturation

To do justice to saturated discernment, this discernment would have to surprise its possessor. Religious experience gives us such a model of saturated discernment. We have so far discussed different types of discernment and the possibility that discernment can itself be characterized according to the phenomena to which it relates as a noetic act to a noematic content: poor phenomena reveal a phenomenologically poor and easily applicable discernment; saturated phenomena– a saturated and almost suspended discernment. But can this result be applied to religious phenomena? We will show in the following pages that, for Christian experience, the saturation of discernment is not decided by the saturation of the phenomena that need to be discerned, but by an experience of a different kind and by another intentionality that enters the scene: the apophatic intentionality of the experience of communion with God, who answers prayers and offers a solution that goes beyond the criteria previously offered by experience and by the world of the person.

Discernment in the Holy Scripture, Apophtegmata Patrum and Philokalia

Let us begin with a brief foray into the understanding of discernment in the Scriptures and in monastic spirituality. The Christian Scriptures use the term diakrisis (διάκρισις) with the meaning of differentiation, discernment, separation, right judgment, and choice between two alternatives– of which one is good and the other is evil. This confrontation with alternatives can also express a state of indecisiveness, which is an enrichment of the classical meaning of discernment brought by the New Testament. The common meaning also becomes a spiritual one in the Holy Scriptures, since the alternatives have to do with spiritual life and discernment has to do with the “distinguishing of spirits”.Footnote 2

Though discernment has been understood in the monastic tradition as a virtue capable of judging all things correctly and a gift of the Holy Spirit necessary for living a Christian life (Ward, 2007: xiii), it is also a result of human efforts and exercises. Saint Paul uses the verb “to exercise” (γυµνάζω) when writing to the Jews about discernment: “And strong food is for the perfect, who have by habit (γεγυµνασµένα ἐχόντων) learned senses to discern (διάκρισιν) good and evil” (Heb. 5:14).

Discernment is involved in the hermeneutics of the Scripture (Florovsky, 1972: 89), in the preaching of the Gospel, and, last but not least, on the path of becoming united with God, i.e., in spiritual life. The meaning of discernment is therefore both theoretical and spiritual.Footnote 3

In Eastern Christian spirituality, the importance of spiritual discernment is clear. For example, the spirituality of the Desert Fathers highlights the fundamental role that the virtue of discernment plays in monastic life. Thus, discernment is seen as “greater than all the virtues” (Wortley, 2013, N.93/21.9) and the defining work of the monk, “the monk’s task” (Wortley, 2013, N.106/21.25). Moreover, we find the following saying: “Some have afflicted their bodies by asceticism, but they lack discernment, and so they are far from God” (Ward, 1984, Anthony, 8). These examples, which could go on, show that discernment as a cardinal virtue is primarily useful for those who possess it, but without being reduced to this, as we shall see below.

Here are a few examples of the importance of discernment taken from the Philokalia: discernment is a virtue which ensures that good is practiced “in a manner that is pleasing to God” (Barsanuphius and John, 2007, Letter 411: 46); “greater than all the other virtues” (Kallistos and Ignatios Xanthopoulos, 2020, II.44), discernment is “the queen and crown of all the virtues” (John of Damaskos, 1981: 340); it is a spiritual faculty, an “eye and lantern of the soul” (John Cassian, 1979: 99), capable of guarding all the virtues; “without the gift of discrimination no virtue can stand or remain firm to the end, for it is the mother of all the virtues and their guardian” (John Cassian, 1979: 100); discernment has the power to distinguish the intelligible from the sensible in Scripture (where it distinguishes “between the letter and the spirit”), in nature (where it distinguishes “between its inner logos and its outward manifestation”), and in oneself (where it distinguishes “between intellect and sensation”) (Maximus the Confessor, 2018, Question 32: 205).Footnote 4

According to Origen, for instance, discernment (diakrisis), practical and mystical at the same time, is the faculty (sense organ) which has the capacity to get closer to God and to know Him mystically, if accompanied by purity of heart, by piety, and the practice of the virtues. It is worth noting here the emphasis placed on the double dimension of discernment: on the one hand, it is a human faculty, a virtue that must be exercised; on the other hand, it is a form of grace, a gift of the Holy Spirit (Rich, 2007: 32, 36–38).

For Evagrius Ponticus, the faculty responsible for discernment is not discursive reason (dianoia), but intellect (nous) (Rich, 2007: 50). He views the importance of discernment as a practical importance, as noted by Natalie Depraz:

The continual work of cleansing the thoughts of passion belongs to the first stage of the exercise, which corresponds to ‘practical’ doing (praxis). Its purpose is to develop in oneself the ability to discern (diakrisis), to discriminate, to judge critically against them. More than any other, Evagrius emphasized the practicality of this discernment. (Depraz, 2022: 46f.)

The connection between spiritual discernment and the practice of the virtues is very much evident in the writings of the Philokalia and other spiritual writings. While the Fathers acknowledge the existence of a natural discernment which is the defining characteristic of human reason, naturally capable of distinguishing between good and evil (Isaac of Nineveh, 1923, XLIV: 212) this discernment is cultivated by practicing the virtues and transfigured by the grace of God. Not all elders have the spiritual gift of discernment, despite their age and experience; therefore, one might not find healing when confessing one’s thoughts to them: “Many who have looked to age as a guide, and then revealed their thoughts, have not only remained unhealed but have been driven to despair because of the inexperience of those to whom they confessed” (John Cassian, 1979: 105).

How does one acquire spiritual discernment? First of all, by practicing the virtues and apatheia (dispassion). Discipleship plays a very important part because it liberates the disciple who places everything in the care and discernment of the Abba, who knows “how he must care for your soul” (Barsanuphius and John, 2006, Letter 288: 283). St Maximus the Confessor notes that “counsel abolishes the lack of discernment” (Maximus the Confessor, 2018, Question 63: 471). Discernment is cultivated by virtues such as silence, ascetic discipline, weeping, fear of God, humility, foresight, love, virtues that render the soul disease-free and dispassionate. (Isaiah of Scetis, 2002: 126). Humility, which comes from obeying our spiritual elders and their instructions, leads to spiritual discernment, a notion found in the writings of St John Cassian and later echoed by others. (see John Cassian, 1979: 103). Philotheos of Sinai has a similar idea about the vivid mindfulness of death, which induces grief, „self-control in all things,” „reminder of hell,” „mother of prayer and tears,” „guarding of the heart and detachment from material things,” in order to finally reach „attentiveness and discrimination” (Philotheos of Sinai, 1984: 38).

Thus, it could be said that discernment is linked to the state of dispassion (apatheia) (Thalassios the Libyan, 1981, First century, 43: 309), being, in the words of St. John Climacus, “a solid understanding of the will of God in all times, in all places, in all things,” which is found only “among those who are pure in heart, in body, and in speech”; discernment is “uncorrupted conscience” and “pure perception” (John Climacus, 1982, Step 26: 229). St Maximus the Confessor puts it concisely: „Dispassion engenders discrimination” (Maximus the Confessor, 1981, Second Century, 25: 69), a virtue which, without being static, is increased by prayer and contemplation (Diadochos of Photiki, 1979: 68, 276).

Second, since the theanthropic practice of the virtues also involves the grace of God, spiritual discernment must be understood as a gift of the Holy Spirit, which the Fathers asked for in prayer in order to lead others (Barsanuphius and John, 2007, Letter 570c: 149). “You see, therefore,” writes St John Cassian, the discernment “is no small virtue, but one of the most important gifts of the Holy Spirit” (John Cassian, 1979: 98). Natural discernment must be transfigured by grace, according to St Isaac the Syrian:

So, if all these [spiritual] things are preserved in their proper state, but grace is not near, they remain, all of them, destitute of the service of their different functions; as it is also during nighttime, when all these things, because of the absence of the sun, remain without function, though they are true and perfect in themselves. I mean eye, sight and things, not those which are distinguishing or distinguished. (Isaac of Nineveh, 1923, LXVII: 317)

Only through this gift of discernment does man become capable not only of leading others but of aspiring towards the higher world, progressing in the spiritual ascent that lies before him and that he would be unable to comprehend without “the lucidity of true discrimination” (Nikitas Stithatos, 1995, 85: 132).

Saturated Discernment

What novelty does the spiritual discernment that we have presented so far bring to our research? Can we speak of a saturated phenomenon, or do we still encounter a suspended phenomenon? What does the outline of this phenomenon look like? Let us first accept that discernment can be a poor phenomenon even for the Desert Fathers. This is, for example, the case of choosing orthodoxy over heterodoxy, as in the case of Abba Agathon. Known for his spiritual discernment, he humbly accepts the accusations of “fornicator,” “proud,” gossiper, and blabber who “is always talking nonsense,” but does not accept being called a “heretic,” which he interprets as a separation from God (Ward, 1984, Agathon 5). We can assume that his theoretical discernment, expressed in the practical context of encountering others, was based on his belonging to the Church and on his knowledge of the criteria that distinguish orthodoxy from heterodoxy. Thus, it is a theological discernment, which did nothing but respect the previous criteria and the decisions already made.

However, the grace of spiritual discernment presupposes that– in addition to the noetic act of discernment and the concrete noematic situation– we accept an intentionality of prayer that awaits God’s decision. When offering a “useful word,” that is, a word that will help those who ask for it to find salvation, the elder must ask God for that word first. The saturated phenomenon of mystical experience, which is the result of prayer and openness toward God, now comes into play. The word that the elder gives to the listeners is not his own; it is given by God for the faith of those who listen. The saturation here comes from what is given through the singular experience of grace, in relation to all the previous knowledge and criteria: the word can surprise not only those who hear it but also the person who utters it and recognizes it as the word of God.

In this experience of spiritual discernment, the outline of the saturated phenomenon is completed. It is not played out on the stage of the world, not even in the world of the desert, made up of novices who ask and an elder who answers; instead, it originates from the other intentionality, that of prayer, of God-oriented consciousness open towards the personal experience of grace. Discernment is saturated because it is not produced based on prior criteria; it is received, as a surprise and as an event, from God. He who discerns understands that his discernment does not actually belong to him and that it is a form of grace, a spiritual gift received to help others; for the edification of the community, and not for individual praise (Ward, 2007: xiv–xv). Discernment does not judge others, but loves them (Ward, 2007: xiv), because it is synonymous with humility (Ward, 2007: xiv). Thus, the insight of the spiritual experience of communion with God illuminates and exceeds the criteria of discernment, enriching them. Discernment practices communion with others based on communion with God, a communion that is practical, theological, and mystical.

Affective Discernment

What role does affectivity play in the case of saturated discernment and why can one speak here of both rational and affective discernment? No form of discernment can exhaust a hermeneutic of revelation, nor does it claim to do so. This is precisely why natural discernment is transfigured by spiritual discernment, which is subject to divine intervention beyond the comprehension of the human mind and has affective characteristics in its genesis and constitution that belong to the bond and union with God. The intellectual discernment of faith is fulfilled by the affective discernment of love, in a spiritual adventure that is not separated from the life of the Church, but rather fulfilled by it. The discernment of the Church constitutes the horizon for spiritual discernment, even though, as we have seen, the latter comes through the grace of the Holy Spirit. Spiritual discernment, which includes both rational and affective discernment, is a type of ecclesial discernment, an actualisation of it, a work, and a virtue of mystical theology.

We have seen that spiritual discernment is the work of God’s grace, which comes at the end of an ascetic and prayerful human endeavour. This endeavour cannot be denied in the absence of fundamental affective dispositions, ranging from humility to the joy of communion with God and mystical union.

Discernment is expressed rationally, but it is also defined by constitutive affective dispositions. Discernment is the “intellectual perception” capable of distinguishing between the gifts of the Spirit and the deceptions of demons (Symeon Metaphrastis, 1984: 45, 304). There is a feeling underneath every thought, which is why, in Orthodox spirituality, the heart is not only the bedrock of feelings but also of thoughts; in this case, the “thoughts of the heart” are thoughts that are aware of their affective roots. Starting from Saint Maximus the Confessor’s idea that “the mind is in the heart,” Fr. Dumitru Stăniloae wrote that the heart

is open towards the infinity of God and perceives the specific depths of each human person. Only through the activity of the heart does human being acquire the discernment that enables him to know God, himself and others in depth. For this discernment is also a vision of the infinity of God and a vision of one’s own indefiniteness in God, as well as that of others. The ‘stretching’ of the heart actualizes its indeterminacy in God. It is activated only by grace, when God’s infinity enters into the heart. That is why spiritual persons aspire to bring their mind back into the heart from its unnatural dispersion into the outer and the finite. (Stăniloae, footnote 210, in Calist și Ignatie Xantopol, 1979)

A profound affectivity marks the discernment which, through the work of grace, transforms a natural virtue into spiritual grace; yet, however clear and concise the language may be, it does not erase the profundity of the affectivity. “Wisdom, intellection and perceptiveness are united in discrimination” (John Cassian, 1979: 100). A matter of life requires an experience of life and an experience of feeling; then, there is the work of the Holy Spirit, which enlightens the virtue and transforms it into spiritual grace; all this testifies both to God’s love for humans and to humans’ love for their neighbours, involved in the search for guidance and the practice of discernment.

The affective component of spiritual discernment does not cancel out the exercise of reason, nor does it reach the modern confrontation of Hegel vs. Schleiermacher, i.e., reason vs. feeling. Given the role of prayer, which involves both reason and affectivity, spiritual discernment recognizes the important dimension of affectivity without excluding that of reason. If dogmatic thought is essential in Orthodoxy, it is no less true that in the absence of life, of living according to the kerygma of the faith, it is simply declared insufficient. We could paraphrase the Kantian dictum about intuition and concept as follows: Thinking without feeling is dead, feeling without thinking is blind.

In summary, spiritual discernment can be understood in terms of several essential constitutive moments that are not fully independent of each other: (1) the acquisition of the virtue of discernment through learning, experience, practicing the virtues, and apatheia; (2) the enlightenment and transfiguration through the work of God’s grace– at which point one can speak of discernment as a gift from God; (3) the recognition of the saturation present at the level of discernment as that which goes beyond all our previous preparations, and, at the same time, the recognition of the fundamental affective dimension that comes from communion with God through prayer and love. In this way, thought, discernment reveals its affective dimension alongside its rational dimension, underlining the importance of affectivity alongside thought in the Orthodox tradition. By God’s grace, affectivity itself, like thought, is transfigured.

In the religious experience of seeing God through the Holy Spirit, St Gregory Palamas speaks of a “spiritual feeling” (αἴσθησις πνευµατική) (Grigorie Palama, 2015, I, 3, 21; see also Depraz, 2022: 94), superior to both thought and affectivity. The work of the Holy Spirit in the guidance of human beings through spiritual discernment could be understood in terms of such an ineffable and mysterious experience. It is the surplus of which the saturated phenomenon speaks, a phenomenon which in this case fulfils the structure of revelation: it is given from elsewhere, paradoxically and to a witness (see Marion, 2020: 549), saturating the horizon in which it is given as “saturation of saturation” (saturation de saturation) (Marion, 2013: 385).

Diacritical Thought

It might be relevant to explore the characteristics of a thought that integrates spiritual discernment, perceived both as saturated and, as we have sought to illustrate, simultaneously imbued with affectivity. We could now describe the features of a possible way of thinking that characterizes Eastern spirituality starting from the idea of discernment. Diacritical thought is (1) primarily a deliberative and therefore decisional religious thought. Faced with the alternatives that challenge it and precede it, this way of thinking deliberates and decides on the truth. It is true that in the face of challenging ideas, diacritical thought is forced to be more than deliberative and can have a speculative and creative character, a character whose fundamental feature is its agreement with tradition, in spite of the proposed novelty. The history of the decisions of the Ecumenical Councils bears witness to this: new teachings are clarifications and developments of tradition, not a definitive reversal, as is often the case with philosophical originality. Because of the importance of agreeing with tradition, which involves a relation with the old teachings, with the community, and with God, diacritical thought is a form of relational thought.

Secondly, (2) it represents the way of thinking for which discernment acknowledges its origin both theoretically and practically: discernment originates from somewhere else. (i) In a first dimension, it comes from the relation with the theoretical-dogmatic criteria offered by a tradition; from the knowledge and understanding of these criteria. It is not synonymous with knowledge in general– whose objectivity is much more pronounced– but with the ability to understand correctly the dogmatic knowledge that precedes it, which becomes its condition of possibility, and to make correct decisions in practical and theoretical situations. Dogmatic discernment, for example, is the ability to judge the extent to which a theory aligns with the teachings of faith, to be able to distinguish between orthodoxy and heterodoxy. The fact that it receives its criteria from elsewhere– tradition, community, teachings– gives diacritical thought its relational dimension. We can imagine that, at this first level, diacritical thought deals with phenomena that might be called “poor” in Marion’s understanding, phenomena for which the concepts of the intellect are not overflowing with intuition. After all, much of academic theology should be thought of as having a similar form of diacritical thought in its structure. (ii) A second meaning of diacritical thought comes from its relationship with God, through prayer and liturgical positioning, through its existence before God and in God– an experience that we could call theosistence. In this case, our thought is amazed by what it receives; it does not possess the conditions of possibility of the phenomenon of discernment in itself. Instead, it receives the answer to the question directly from God. Discernment has to do here with a saturated phenomenon, with an excessive and surprising experience, which no longer follows from the application of criteria that can be controlled by reason.

There is no doubt that this saturated discernment presupposes some form of previous preparation by practicing the virtues, purifying our hearts, learning, and living in faith; but these are all conditions that do not determine/produce the amazing response. Thought here involves prayer and the answer is provided in an exceptional manner through the work of the Holy Spirit. All the previous preparations– asceticism, prayer, purity of heart– were made in order to acquire the gift of the Holy Spirit; this preparation is the work of the self to open itself towards the uncreated energies of God. Therefore, spiritual discernment is living communion with God (which equally implies different affective dimensions), dialogue of prayer, and ability to hear and listen, through existential-theological openness, to the word-answer that God offers to humanity for spiritual progress, be it his own or that of the community. Freedom and listening meet here in a mystery that transcends both.

In conclusion, diacritical thought is a form of theological hermeneutics made possible based both on the criteria of interpretation (derived from faith, love, experience, and community), and on its goals– doing, enlightenment, and perfection. However, as a form of theological hermeneutics, it turns its direction upside down, transforming the human person from an interpreter to the one being interpreted, i.e., to one who participates in a new way of spiritual life. As much as the word is of use to the person who asks for it, it also transforms, through the grace that it bears, the person who, while praying, offers it. The grace of spiritual discernment transcends mere human judgment, reflecting instead that of God. It aligns with the description of the saturated phenomenon and encompasses both affectivity and thought, while also infinitely surpassing them.